git-am and git-rebase inconsistency

David Kågedal· Jan 19, 2007, 23:53 UTC · lore

The git-am and git-rebase commands have some similarities in that both try to apply patches and may fail in the middle. Both commands can be rerun to continue the application. The --skip option is used in both to skip one patch, but when a conflict has been resolved, git-rebase uses --continue, and git-am uses --resolved for what seems to me to be the equivalent action.

It would probably be good, although not terribly important, if these commands were change to be in harmony. But I'm not sure which option I like best...

-- 
David Kågedal

Junio C Hamano· Jan 20, 2007, 00:25 UTC · re: David Kågedal · lore

Re: git-am and git-rebase inconsistency

David Kågedal <davidk@lysator.liu.se> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

> The git-am and git-rebase commands have some similarities in that both
> try to apply patches and may fail in the middle.  Both commands can be
> rerun to continue the application.  The --skip option is used in both
> to skip one patch, but when a conflict has been resolved, git-rebase
> uses --continue, and git-am uses --resolved for what seems to me to be
> the equivalent action.
>
> It would probably be good, although not terribly important, if these
> commands were change to be in harmony.  But I'm not sure which option
> I like best...

Well, git-rebase did not have any options like them in the beginning, so a logical option would be to add --resolved as a synonym to the latter.